Politics of presidential polls

Institutions, like reputations, do take quite some time to grow, marinade and mature. Especially those that are critical to a nation’s constitutional existence and also impact its image before the big, wide world outside. The fourteenth President of our Republic has thus to be viewed not just as someone who was propped up by the strongest political alliance or by one whose victory signals yet again the current invincibility of the brilliant duo from Gujarat. It would be unfair, however, to remonstrate the present regime for politicising elections to the august office of the President. The credit for this goes to Indira Gandhi. Way back in 1969, when she masterminded VV Giri’s win over the official Congress candidate, she actually utilised the President’s election to demonstrate her political strength and ambition. Her Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed will never be forgiven for capitulating to sign the infamous declaration of Emergency. 

But the India of the second decade in the new millennium is not the same as that of the 1970s. The Rashtrapati is now the inheritor of an office that carries an amorphous expectation from an increasingly vocal citizenry. Most of his predecessors, not all, had contributed well to defy what the first Prime Minister had chosen to describe this post, as: “a figurehead”. True, his major task is to concur with what the executive has willed in the best interests of the nation, but he also has to ensure absolute propriety. When Ram Nath Kovind steps in, as is almost certain, and occupies the crowning glory of imperial architecture, he would be expected to uphold the high public standards that the grand old man of Indian politics leaves behind. Let us remember how he belied the apprehension in 2014 that a Rashtrapati who was uncompromising in secularism and plurality was, sooner or later, sure to come into conflict with a declared right-wing government that rarely disguised its preference for the majority religion over others. But Pranab Mukherjee proved that his acumen was higher than that of an equally senior and astute Zail Singh, who had missed no opportunity to torment a swaggering Rajiv Gandhi, by sending his ‘wide balls’ for instant over-boundaries. He proved that the PM and the President could differ ideologically and yet not rock the nation’s boat. He had, after all, honed his adroit skills of surviving and prospering in his own party when the centre of real power may have often pulled every muscle to ‘contain’ or cut him to size. 

It is too early to procure reliable historical evidence where recent Presidential elections are concerned, to prove or disprove the theory of the expert twitch-readers of Lutyens’ Delhi. In 2007, the word that went around was that the power-that-was-then had foisted a little-known lady from the backwoods of India mainly to pre-empt Mukherjee. We may never know the truth but the point is that while Mukherjee made his liberal views clear at every public opportunity and often rebuked the present regime for some apparent failings, his quiet dignity ensured that the constitutional arrangement was never jeopardised. He sent back Bills and he often sought more convincing reasons for several decisions and proposals of the government. But except in the rarest of rare cases where he may have quietly and privately counselled the PM, he never drew upon his reserve powers to filibuster or stymie a legitimately elected government. Dignity can do wonders and someone who has internalised genuine Gandhian values can withstand whatever hubris may seek to inflict. 

Earlier too, learned Presidents like Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Zakir Husain and KR Narayanan had demonstrated how a placid countenance not only complements a reservoir of knowledge and wisdom but can subtly and actually influence those who start with strong differences. Let us not deny that India is aghast at the brazenness with which violence is repeatedly inflicted on those who are disliked or choose to differ. Dissent, the very elixir of democracy, is under threat and the tree of liberty may soon wilt if this trend continues. 

Or, it may well be that the apprehensions of those who are more vocal at infringements on civil liberties can actually be addressed with reason and facts. These are not being marshalled at present, with coolness. At this juncture, therefore, our new President has a really critical role to play: as a credible interlocutor and a genuine healer. 

The author is a retired civil servant and the former CEO of Prasar Bharati. Views expressed are personal.